Wanderers in £2.5m funding hole but "players will be paid" insists co-owner Ken Anderson

They both look like Boggers, Bonce.

The rhinoceros hornbill offers a two for one.
Great value.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Unknown 'nutters heading for Magoo's gaff.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

JAH wrote:You believe all these twisted conspiracy theories or you see the ST for what it is, a bunch of volunteers that want to see the best for our club.

It is strange that KA and his non existent funds gets less discussion than the ST. I think we should be very worried who KA gets his investment from, if at all.

Interesting that you raise the issue of conspiracy theories in the same breath of making accusations about the new owners which I believe are yet to be proved?

Perhaps you have your own agenda.

I always have an agenda Fabian! Night night.

Seems to have kicked off a bit whilst I was away.

Thank you to those who have shown me support.

It's clear for most to see what's been going on here which is not what is being said about the ST but who is saying it.

Of course people are allowed to hold their own views and opinions on here - and I claim my right to have those too.

If people want to try to shoot them down by fair and reasoned debate then great - that is what a forum is all about - but to go to the extreme of scouring random peoples twitter history as the only way to carry on the argument tends to show every other sane person reading the thread what this is truly about.

I've clearly explained what happened, why it happened and the consequential result of it happening and nobody as yet been close to shoot it down other than this feeble argumentative attempt -

bwfc1874 wrote:Birch was charged with finding a buyer for the club, seems that's what he was trying to do to me. The Holdsworth deal seemed dead in the water at that point if you remember.

Fact of the matter is there are plausible alternatives to your version of events.

Which basically says Birch wanted the ST to buy the club from Davies when no one else wanted it but dumped them as soon as somebody else did with a better offer!  In that case the ST was played by Birch for the benefit of Davies.  Can anyone deny that?

If the ST genuinely thought they could buy the club when no one else was interested then why pay top dollar for it when they could have picked it up for peanuts out of Administration (remember the Administrator has to give them first dibs!) thus saving themselves a small fortune that could be then INVESTED in the club rather than go in Davies back pocket!

Does anyone seriously think the ST is a charity case aiming to see Davies get the maximum out of them and leave them threadbare to run the club?

If they were thank God they are not in control now with those same muppets in charge.

I keep offering the ST to come on here and set the matter straight - tell us what they did and why they did it.

They are supposed to be transparent in their actions aren't they?  Supposed to act for the good of the fans?

So come on, we are all ears, speak to us, tell us what you did and why.

Anybody seriously think they will?

Natasha Whittam wrote:

Keegan wrote:I don't have the opportunity as often as I would like, to pop in and see how the gang is doing

Are you in prison?

He's in a nut house, I think this forum sent him insane.

JAH wrote:I always have an agenda Fabian! Night night.

Since you went to bed early, I didn't want to bother you last night, but I was hoping that since there is nothing wrong with an agenda when shared as a common frame of reference for a conversation perhaps you would like to share.

Since it is only fair that I do similar regarding the ST,

1) I believe for the best of the ST whilst the steering group should be applauded for their efforts they should step aside, as such I will not be voting for them and will actively encourage other to do so providing there are viable alternatives with the correct skill set.

2) Increasing membership of the ST should be encouraged, it's great that so many people have a wide variety of opinions and these should be welcomed. The ST should be a forum for all not just a few or those that fit with what may be perceived to be mainstream views and so as well as welcoming those with different views it's important that they are listened to, therefore I would support anything that encourages participation in the ST for all.

2) I will not support any plan by the ST that actively pursues a financial stake in BWFC at this time unless it is clear that the current owners are seeking a buyer or the club is threatened with administration.

3) I will not support any plan to purchase a minority stake in the club, given past experience in buying shares which where then given up with no value.

4) I will support and encourage the ST to set up a strong contingency plan that would set out the key actions to step in should the circumstances in 2 arise.

5) I will encourage the ST to set up any initiatives that increases the fan base, brings the current fan base together in support of the club and improves communication between the club, supporters and the community.

It's quite a basic shopping list really and these are the things I want to hear and then more importantly what I want to see happen / not happen, and it's on this basis that I comment on the ST actions and on the views of others.

Perhaps you would like to be more forthcoming with your own agenda and views rather than just shooting down others opinions?

Fabian, you should put yourself forward for the elections. With such a clear message that so many of us want and agree with you are exactly the sort of person that people would get behind and vote for to represent us. You should seriously consider it.

Sluffy wrote:I've clearly explained what happened, why it happened and the consequential result of it happening and nobody as yet been close to shoot it down -

bwfc1874 wrote:Birch was charged with finding a buyer for the club, seems that's what he was trying to do to me. The Holdsworth deal seemed dead in the water at that point if you remember.

Fact of the matter is there are plausible alternatives to your version of events.

Which basically says Birch wanted the ST to buy the club from Davies when no one else wanted it but dumped them as soon as somebody else did with a better offer!  In that case the ST was played by Birch for the benefit of Davies.  Can anyone deny that?

You asked for a credible alternative to Birch manipulating the ST in Davies's favour. Birch was there to find a buyer for the club, so just about every action he could have taken at the time could be perceived to be for the benefit of the the club (and as such Davies). 

Whether or not Birch did this in an attempt to increase the price of rival bids or for a contingency after losing faith in any of the other consortiums actually putting a bid on the table, we can only speculate to as neither of us are Trevor Birch.

You asked for a credible alternative to your version of events, I've given you one. As I've said throughout I've no idea what's true or not, just highlighting alternatives.

By the way, I agree about a reasoned debate, we're all allowed to have an opinion. But notice I'm not the one throwing insults and having digs on this thread, it's you.

bwfc1874 wrote:

Sluffy wrote:I've clearly explained what happened, why it happened and the consequential result of it happening and nobody as yet been close to shoot it down -

bwfc1874 wrote:Birch was charged with finding a buyer for the club, seems that's what he was trying to do to me. The Holdsworth deal seemed dead in the water at that point if you remember.

Fact of the matter is there are plausible alternatives to your version of events.

Which basically says Birch wanted the ST to buy the club from Davies when no one else wanted it but dumped them as soon as somebody else did with a better offer!  In that case the ST was played by Birch for the benefit of Davies.  Can anyone deny that?

You asked for a credible alternative to Birch manipulating the ST in Davies's favour. Birch was there to find a buyer for the club, so just about every action he could have taken at the time could be perceived to be for the benefit of the the club (and as such Davies). 

Whether or not Birch did this in an attempt to increase the price of rival bids or for a contingency after losing faith in any of the other consortiums actually putting a bid on the table, we can only speculate to as neither of us are Trevor Birch.

You asked for a credible alternative to your version of events, I've given you one. As I've said throughout I've no idea what's true or not, just highlighting alternatives.

By the way, I agree about a reasoned debate, we're all allowed to have an opinion. But notice I'm not the one throwing insults and having digs on this thread, it's you.

Hahahaha.  No you do it on pm instead.

Leave it out Johnny. I asked you to explain on PM so this thread didn't become a back and forth between me and you. All you could do was tell me to fuck off in 3 different ways, so I had a dig back.

No i told you to get fucked after you demanded an apology.  You persisted so i told you to bore off you bellend.  Then you showed your true colours!!!! Amazing how you try and be so reasoned and calm on here but on pm, well, you're hilarious.

Okay, cheers Johnny.

Embarrassing stuff.

looks like i missed a lot last night! For what it's worth i don't agree with Sluffy and his conspiracy theories but this is a forum and people have to be able to express their views without it kicking off and getting personal

I know we all love BWFC and its an emotive subject but people need to take a step back down and cool off

Norpig wrote:looks like i missed a lot last night! For what it's worth i don't agree with Sluffy and his conspiracy theories but this is a forum and people have to be able to express their views without it kicking off and getting personal

I know we all love BWFC and its an emotive subject but people need to take a step back down and cool off

Well said.

bwfc1874, you need to seriously switch your computer off, go out and get some fresh air.

Well said Norpig (not about my 'conspiracy theory though!).

Unfortunately some people have their own hidden agenda and are not always as they try to portray themselves to be.

The level of modding of this forum I always envisaged would reflect the language and behaviour that you might expect to hear and see from others around you if you were at a game.  

We certainly are not as PC and angelic as other forums but neither is everyone who goes to the game, and weird or abusive things are said or done which at times you don't agree with or may find not to your particular liking or offensive.

When this happens you either say something in public, report it to the proper authority, or simply walk away from it - you don't go following that person around at every match they attend from then on, nor find out how they can contact them privately and then bombard them with personal abusive stuff.

Unfortunately this sort of behaviour does happen on the internet and not just on here.

It was clear for all to see how one or two have 'issues' with me which manifests itself in how they constantly respond to what I post - and the obsessiveness of their behaviour towards my standpoint.

I'm long in the tooth on internet forums and that sort of behaviour towards me as never bothered me BUT it does not make for good reading to others on the forum and spoils their enjoyment of the site.

Clearly yesterday evening it got too much for some and they said as much (I thank them for their support of me).

This then turned very nasty in the unpleasant personal shite that was sent via personal mail to one of those.

As was expressed on this forum this morning their 'true colours' were clearly shown.

This is a clear banning offence on Nuts.

However no formal complaint has been received from the person subjected to the personal abuse mailed to him and I feel that if I were to act as is my clearly duty to do so, that it may seem to others that I've used the opportunity to settle an old score for myself.

I feel therefore the best course of action would be to leave the person free to decide his own immediate future on here in the knowledge that we all now know full well about his past obsessive argumentative behaviour towards me and his foul personal abuse sent multiple times in private to another member.

His card is well and truly marked.

I hope people will consider that a fair and reasonable decision.

The door is not shut to him and he is free to return and redeem himself if he so choses.

The ball is in his court.